1:58.65.
That's it, go for it.
1:58.65.
That's it, go for it.
Master of Lolly wrote:
1:58.65.
That's it, go for it.
I'm good for about 2:30 at 47. I don't see getting anywhere near that.
My guess is that that record will fall soon and keep falling for a while. There's a dozen stalwarts out there right now who could drop that time w moderate training for the event. 1:55 should show up within a couple years.
jamese1045@hotmail.comwrote:
My guess is that that record will fall soon and keep falling for a while. There's a dozen stalwarts out there right now who could drop that time w moderate training for the event. 1:55 should show up within a couple years.
That's what I excpected it to be. 1:58 is surprisingly soft.
Master of LolIy wrote:
jamese1045@hotmail.comwrote:
My guess is that that record will fall soon and keep falling for a while. There's a dozen stalwarts out there right now who could drop that time w moderate training for the event. 1:55 should show up within a couple years.
1:58 is surprisingly soft.
Clearly you are wrong since the WORLD RECORD for that age is 1:58
ligma wrote:
Master of LolIy wrote:
1:58 is surprisingly soft.
Clearly you are wrong since the WORLD RECORD for that age is 1:58
Well, the 400m WR for that age is 50.51 and the 800m WR for M45 is 1:49.86. So clearly I am NOT wrong, if one is familiar with a definition of hard and soft records. It is a fairly soft record, about 3 seconds slower than it should / could be.
In principle, I agree that the record is somewhat "soft" and someone like Tony Whitemann should be able to break it.
The problem is that runners tend to break down or lose motivation around age 50 and a lot of training and perfect fitness is required to run sub-2 at age 50. If I recall correctly, Tony has stopped competing due to age, lack of motivation and nagging injuries, but perhaps he will do comeback for the M50 record.
Master of LolIy wrote:
ligma wrote:
Clearly you are wrong since the WORLD RECORD for that age is 1:58
Well, the 400m WR for that age is 50.51 and the 800m WR for M45 is 1:49.86. So clearly I am NOT wrong, if one is familiar with a definition of hard and soft records. It is a fairly soft record, about 3 seconds slower than it should / could be.
Go get it then.
Yes you are very wrong. There’s a huge difference between a sprinter and a middle distance runner.
Unless you are 50 or older, don’t even bother commenting. You have no idea.
My dudes, I have run a 400m in 50, 800m in 1:54 and 1500m in 3:57, so I am positive that I know my way around.
1:58 for M50 WR is soft and I would gladly try to get it, except I need to wait another 20 years and untill then it will be 1:55 already...
Master of Lolly wrote:
My dudes, I have run a 400m in 50, 800m in 1:54 and 1500m in 3:57, so I am positive that I know my way around.
1:58 for M50 WR is soft and I would gladly try to get it, except I need to wait another 20 years and untill then it will be 1:55 already...
sorry, it's not fair to compare a runner in his prime and a guy at age 50. i know what i am talking about, and i am age 51. 1:58 at age 50 is age-graded 1:44. very hard.
the details:
if the 400m world record is 50.51s in the m50, how fast does the m50 800m world record have to be over 400m? 54s or 55s? tony whiteman ran the 400m in 51.8 seconds in 2017, i think at age 46. and now, 5 years later? let's assume 54s, just guessing.
ideally, you go for the first lap in 57-58s, right? same thing again and then it could be really roughly 1:55 to 1:56, i don't know. the problem is the need for an excellent aerobic base (well, 11 seconds more of pain) and a basic speed pretty close to the level of national class 400m masters runners. and that's very difficult to train at age 50. sorry for my english.
Master of Lolly wrote:
My dudes, I have run a 400m in 50, 800m in 1:54 and 1500m in 3:57, so I am positive that I know my way around.
1:58 for M50 WR is soft and I would gladly try to get it, except I need to wait another 20 years and untill then it will be 1:55 already...
Oh man, you’re in for a rude awakening. Training/competing after age 45 is more about managing injuries than anything else.
Besides that, 1:54 at age 30 won’t even come close to sub 2 at 40, let alone 50.
is viagra considered a ped?
Master of Lolly wrote:
1:58.65.
That's it, go for it.
On his 50th birthday Bernard Lagat should head to the track and set the M50 records in the 800, 1500 and 5000 in a single session. Heck, he’s probably already 50 yrs old now and looks very fit.
Of course there are people out there who were world elites in their day who could knock this record down a lot, but they'd have to be healthy and willing to try. I know that I've fallen off a cliff after hitting 50 because of nagging injuries as well as a lack of training partners and consistent access to a track. The injuries have made it extremely difficult to do speedwork of any quality. I can do high mileage, but low quality high mileage isn't doing it even for the marathon because heel pain has prevented me from even doing much sub 7 work prior to that race. This situation is very common at this age. They lock up all the tracks as well. I had a security guard question me and make me leave a track I'd been going to for ten years. It's messed up, considering how unhealthy our society is, that they don't even let people use the tracks built with public money. But no tracks, no quick 800s.
I agree. I’m 58, and at this point in life it’s just patch, patch, patch. Many former elites are now way out of shape, shockingly so. Lagat however looks like he did 15 years ago. I’m sure he’ll be able to roll out of bed and break those M50 records when the time comes if he cares to try.
athletics wes(t) wrote:
Master of Lolly wrote:
My dudes, I have run a 400m in 50, 800m in 1:54 and 1500m in 3:57, so I am positive that I know my way around.
1:58 for M50 WR is soft and I would gladly try to get it, except I need to wait another 20 years and untill then it will be 1:55 already...
Oh man, you’re in for a rude awakening. Training/competing after age 45 is more about managing injuries than anything else.
Besides that, 1:54 at age 30 won’t even come close to sub 2 at 40, let alone 50.
Sadly I wasted a lot of energy and potential on doing the wrong things and spending way too much time injured. I suppose it is a lot about staying healthy at this age, but knowing that M45 record is 1:49 and M55 being 2:01, the M50 record of 1:58 does seem relatively soft.
Nowadays I realize that running under 2:00 is not that complicated, if you don't bullsh!t around. Stabilisation and plyometrics have to be massively incorporated in the training, otherwise it is all injuries, no matter if old or young.
This got me looking at the 800 world records by age. Jose Vicente Rioseco Lopez ran a 2:41.59 at age 80?? That's insane.
slowenoughat30 wrote:
This got me looking at the 800 world records by age. Jose Vicente Rioseco Lopez ran a 2:41.59 at age 80?? That's insane.
It is crazy. Mostmen can't even walk properly at that age, if they're even alive.